Ron Paul and Romney Going Head to Head Here on Out

I hope Paul takes his base and runs third party, in fact I'd be a little upset if he didnt.

It would certainly put PAID to any notion he and his loony followers were ever really part of the GOP.
But he's already announced that won't happen. I guess you'll have to deal with political obscurity.

The Republican party just like the Democratic party is an umbrella. The Republicans have enjoyed having the 10% or so of libertarian voters go their way for a long time. But get all buyt6thurt just because the Republican party has shifted so far left that the groups that make it up start to shed off.

The GOP is not the borg you twat...

No the 10% figure is the mythical percentage of homosexuals in society, not narco-libertarians in the GOP. That's another mythical percentage.
The actual percentage in both cases is about 3%.
 
I would like to see Paul become president.
It would be interesting to say the least and he would likely die of a stroke before his first term was up.
Not sure about that as I saw a segment dealing with his age and the presidency, and he apparently takes good care of himself, but if by a miracle him, or anyone with his ideas about the Fed, the economy, and foreign policy were to become prez, I'd be more worried about an assassination then anything else.
He'd be stepping on a lot of powerful toes with the means to buy his demise.
On another note he seems to be getting a decent amount of delegates for someone deemed so irrelevant by the MSM. He won the majority of them in Iowa after all was said and done and Romney was given that state.
I wonder how the momentum and coverage of his campaign would have been different had all the questionable states like Maine, Nevada, Iowa, etc been more accurate, and in some instances honest.
Maybe more people, on the fence, or like the ones that will only vote for the candidate they feel has a solid chance and leading, would have jumped on his campaign bandwagon.
Anyway his message and "radical" proposals take time to sink into such a brainwashed and indoctrinated populace, but it's gaining steady support despite the attempts to minimize him and a deliberate lack of coverage.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tXMUCmU2evI&feature=player_embedded]Ron Paul wins Iowa - YouTube[/ame]

It's easy to forget, especially with the seemingly dictatorial attitudes of the last 2 administrations, that many of Pauls plans would never see the light of day as he would face not only huge opposition from the Demos but his own party as the majority are handcuffed to the entities that Pauls policies would effect.
Still, even a small change could kickstart the urgently needed reforms
that the nation needs, especially anything that would help the middle class which has to be healthy as it fills both the supply and demand sides of the economy.
As it stands now the current situation of the economy has injured a class of people vital to its function as it is historically more uneven then many of us can be remember.
 
Last edited:
And now you understand why I would like Paul to run third party... The Reps use conservatives, the party is very liberal.

Supporting drug legalization and surrender to radical Muslims isn't conservative.

Well, the 'surrender to Muslims' quip is just a perverse fantasy on your part, but drug legalization has been supported by many prominent conservatives.
 
I didnt realize the GOP was lacking in wookie-suiters. Personally Im happy to cede that demographic to the Dems.

When Romney loses every demographic to Obama in November except white men on viagra, you're going to be begging for wookie suiters...and a new catch phrase.

So you want Obama to win. Got it.

Hey Truthmatters, how's it goin Truthmatters?

I like how if people vote for who they feel best represents them some people feel it is their duty to attack them for it... This is an America I'm sure the FF would be proud of, lol!

I fully support you Rabbi in voting for Mitt, but he is still a liberal. Try not attacking others for not voting for a liberal if they don't feel that liberal represents their position on issues important to them. However if you feel that liberal (Mitt) represents you, then vote for him.
 
It would certainly put PAID to any notion he and his loony followers were ever really part of the GOP.
But he's already announced that won't happen. I guess you'll have to deal with political obscurity.

The Republican party just like the Democratic party is an umbrella. The Republicans have enjoyed having the 10% or so of libertarian voters go their way for a long time. But get all buyt6thurt just because the Republican party has shifted so far left that the groups that make it up start to shed off.

The GOP is not the borg you twat...

No the 10% figure is the mythical percentage of homosexuals in society, not narco-libertarians in the GOP. That's another mythical percentage.
The actual percentage in both cases is about 3%.

Ok, then you lose 3%, landslide loss, enjoy it =D
 
And now you understand why I would like Paul to run third party... The Reps use conservatives, the party is very liberal.

Supporting drug legalization and surrender to radical Muslims isn't conservative.

You lost me... Who said anything about legalizing drugs and surrendering to Muslims? Get me some direct quotes… Pauls position is as President he would have no athority over drugs as it's not in the constitution, howevere states can... But you knew that...... Or you just don't unstand or maybe have not read the constitution.

Funny though, because Republicans record in the last ten years is something along the lines of spending trillions we don’t have by either having to borrow or print it, that is conservative? Doing TARP, stimulus and expanding near every welfare program and dumping more cash we don’t have on foreign aid is conservative? Starting wars without congress declaring the wars is now constitutional because of a “War powers act” that pretty much voids the constitution?

Dude, you're so funny to watch waddle in circles.
 
Last edited:
And now you understand why I would like Paul to run third party... The Reps use conservatives, the party is very liberal.

Supporting drug legalization and surrender to radical Muslims isn't conservative.
I wouldn't legalize every drug, but legalizing industrial pot, the cannabis with so low THC it wouldn't be worth smoking, would be a great infusion of jobs and tax revenue, and help many with its medicinal effects.
As for surrendering to any muslim radicals? We shouldn't surrender to any radicals including zionist, christian, or muslims.
We need to put America first for starters, but we also wouldn't have to worry about radicals if we would only stop fucking with the rest of the world and take care of our own problems, instead of trying to pursue imperialists conquests and world police policies, and allowing other nations to dictate those that are counter productive to America.
We need a president that will end the PNAC mindset.
 
I didnt realize the GOP was lacking in wookie-suiters. Personally Im happy to cede that demographic to the Dems.

When Romney loses every demographic to Obama in November except white men on viagra, you're going to be begging for wookie suiters...and a new catch phrase.

So you want Obama to win. Got it.

I don't want either one of them you moron, but there's no way Romney is going to win. He's got NOTHING to run on. Even the things he can run AGAINST Obama on are things he himself has supported, so his entire position in the race is weak at best.
 
The last 2 candidates the GOP has offered up for the presidency are McCain and Romney. Both of them together still don't even equal a decent conservative. They're some of the WORST in the GOP on conservatism.

Talk to me when you finally get it figured out. It ain't going to be this year though, I'll tell you that.
 
And when Rabbi votes for Mitt, but Obama wins I'll be here to tell Rabbi that he supported a loser and that his vote was wasted meaning Rabbi helped get Obama elected!!!

Such fun logic!
 
And now you understand why I would like Paul to run third party... The Reps use conservatives, the party is very liberal.

Supporting drug legalization and surrender to radical Muslims isn't conservative.

You lost me... Who said anything about legalizing drugs and surrendering to Muslims? Get me some direct quotes… Pauls position is as President he would have no athority over drugs as it's not in the constitution, howevere states can... But you knew that...... Or you just don't unstand or maybe have not read the constitution.

Funny though, because Republicans record in the last ten years is something along the lines of spending trillions we don’t have by either having to borrow or print it, that is conservative? Doing TARP, stimulus and expanding near every welfare program and dumping more cash we don’t have on foreign aid is conservative? Starting wars without congress declaring the wars is now constitutional because of a “War powers act” that pretty much voids the constitution?

Dude, you're so funny to watch waddle in circles.

Question....If Bush said they hate us for our freedoms, and obviously according to him they did...Then why are we surrendering our freedoms more and more all the time?
I mean, isn't doing that a victory of sorts for the "radical muslims"?

I swear the stupidity and hypocrisy is so fucking obvious, perhaps smoking a fucking doob would do some people some good by helping to expand their minds and consciousness and making them able to realize this type of shit :lol:
 
Is that the speech where he aknowledged that since he can't win he's wasting everyone's time and money by continuing?
I knew Perry was smarter than Paul.
 
Is that the speech where he aknowledged that since he can't win he's wasting everyone's time and money by continuing?
I knew Perry was smarter than Paul.
Not even you listen to what Perry has to say. Classic!

Must suck to find out that good looks can't get more votes than Ron Paul. :lmao:
 
I take it Pool Raker gave up on his own special definition of what constitutes a natural-born citizen?
 

Forum List

Back
Top